Is this in best interest of Los Lunas’ citizens?
Regarding the condemnation and immediate taking of the Jarratt Farm by the Village of Los Lunas, I am stunned that Philip Jaramillo would say this outrageous act is being done in the citizens’ interest. Is defying Judge Pope’s order that both parties participate in mediation before proceeding with the taking of private land in the citizens’ interest?
Is ignoring the efforts of Sen. Michael Sanchez to secure state land for an alternate wastewater treatment facility — the wetlands alternative — in the citizens’ interests? Sen. Sanchez, after all, represents the citizens. Is Jaramillo’s making a specious argument that the village must own the land in order to get funding in the citizens’ interest?
Are valley farmers and residents, who, like the Jarratts, are also in the path of the proposed river crossing reassured that the village is acting in their interests? Or are they next?
The village would be well advised to invite Gunter Pauli of Zero Emissions Research & Initiatives to make a presentation before the Village Council. In Pauli’s book, “Upsizing: The Road to Zero Emissions, More Jobs, More Income, and No Pollution,” the Chair of the United Nations Convention on Biodiversity, Sarwono Kusumaatmadja, says “it is not anymore a question if zero emissions works or not, but rather when will it be implemented all around the world?” A commitment to using the waste in a wetlands rather than treating it and dumping it into the citizens’ precious river would be in the citizens’ interest.
Save farmers, not minnows
I would like to thank Mr. and Mrs. Leroy Hacker for their letter on May 22 in concerns toward the (silvery) minnow. I believe that many who try to save the silvery minnow at the farmer’s or rancher’s expense are ignorant of the history of the Rio Grande. I have talked to over a dozen local people in the area who have lived in the valley for over 40 to 70 years who can recall at least one time in their lives when they saw the Rio Grande completely dry (in reference to lack of visible running water above the ground). Yet, the silvery minnow continues to exist today. If environmentalists are so concerned about conservation of the silvery minnow, then let me make this suggestion: the money that environmentalists use to protect the minnow at local farmer’s or ranchers’ expense could be used instead to build a silvery minnow fish hatchery.
As a nephew of a Kansas farmer, I know that the agriculture industry is extremely valuable to our county’s, state’s and country’s economy; it is responsible for producing much of the food we buy at the stores and eat (bread, corn, fruit, chile, beef, pork, lamb, etc.). My point is do not let the local farmers and ranchers go under because of efforts to save a minnow, but (if one is so zealous to do so) use that zeal to come up with other ways to breed more silvery minnow without taking agricultural ditchwater from those who need it most: the local farmers and ranchers.
(Editor’s note: All letters must include a telephone number so that authorship can be verified. Send letters to News-Bulletin, P.O. Box 25, Belen 87002.)